Request for studies upon which Minister of Health had relied in making a public statement

Request for studies upon which Minister of Health had relied in making a public statement—list of papers provided—requester disputes whether papers adequately supported her declared position—definition of ‘official information’—s 2—no requirement for holder to enter into debate—no investigation commenced

The requester asked the Minister of Health to provide details of studies upon which she had personally relied in making a public statement about an issue that was open to scientific dispute. The Minister responded by listing numerous papers of which she and her advisers had taken account. No identifiable information was withheld.

The requester disputed whether the papers described by the Minister adequately supported her declared position, and sought to distinguish information held by the Minister and that held by officials. He asked that either the Minister cite ‘relevant research’ supporting her position, or ‘clearly acknowledge’ that none existed.

Ministers are entitled to rely upon advice of officials and, in this case, the information held by officials was also held by the Minister. In other words, it was not appropriate to distinguish the information held by the Minister from that held by her officials.

Section 12 of the OIA permits requests to be made for ‘official information’. Section 2 of the Act defines official information as information which is ‘held’ by persons and organisations which are subject to it. The Act does not operate as a mechanism to compel holders of official information to enter into debate upon issues of interest to the requester. An Ombudsman has no jurisdiction, either direct or indirect, to require a Minister to justify a particular position, or to provide the type of acknowledgement that was sought by the requester.

In the circumstances, it was not appropriate for any investigation under the OIA to commence.

This case note is published under the authority of the Ombudsmen Rules 1989 opens page in this tab. It sets out an Ombudsman’s view on the facts of a particular case. It should not be taken as establishing any legal precedent that would bind an Ombudsman in future.